Talk:You Reign

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the You Reign article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

You Reign was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 2, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed

Christian music High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:You Reign/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 17:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Failing because of the prose and reference issues. I'll start with the prose, or the lack of it. There simply is not enough information, it would take a lot more for this article to qualify as a Good Article. There are basic grammar issues, such as commenting that the song " is another worship song, why is the quotation mark not next to "is"? And why have apostrophes been used instead of quotation marks? There are one line sentences by themselves as well as one sentence sub-sections, which looks very weak. There is no Credits section, which is a basic must have for song article. Why is there a bullet point for the recording info in the Info Box?

There is a major issue of over linking, specifically Billboard and Prometheus Global Media. You only need to link the first instance. Musicnotes URL is not needed per consensus. And the references should be spilt into two columns.

Article is under prepared with a lack of information and basic mistakes. There are a lot of sources for such little prose, you should be able to expand the sections to be honest or find new information. The layout should be re-worked to make it look more presentable and not lacking in nearly every way. There are no pictures or an audio file to illustrate your points, I'm sure the latter of which could be done. Until that happens, I don't think this article could ever qualify for GA status. It doesn't meet GA requirements at the moment. I can't put on hold because I don't think this article would be able to be improved to the degree it needs to in such a short amount of time. Calvin • ^{Watch n' Learn} 18:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]